I've discussed the subject in other threads over the years, but only briefly, and the Zeitoun case has been getting a lot of attention lately. So, I want to expand upon my previous comments.
I still think the Zeitoun case involves genuine paranormal activity. And I still think it's best explained as non-Marian human psi (paranormal activity by one or more humans other than Mary).
I may go into the case in more depth in the future, but I want to make several points for now. Since Zeitoun has been getting so much attention in recent weeks, this is a good opportunity to get some of the relevant information to a larger audience.
One of Cameron Bertuzzi's videos on Zeitoun is an interview with Travis Dumsday. I recommend also listening to Jeffrey Mishlove's interview with Dumsday. Mishlove is, among other things, a paranormal researcher who used to host a program on PBS that addressed paranormal issues. In comparison to Cameron's interview, Mishlove's involves more discussion of the problems with the Zeitoun apparitions, parallels with other paranormal cases, potential non-Marian paranormal interpretations, etc. See, for example, the segments in the interview here and here.
I'm not trying to be exhaustive, but here are a few explanatory options that would be consistent with Protestantism:
- We could be agnostic about it. It would have to be sincere agnosticism, not just professing agnosticism while knowing that the evidence favors a particular view. And the agnosticism would have to be scrutinized, just like any other position.
- The appearance of a Protestant Mary, meaning a Mary consistent with Protestantism.
- Demonic activity.
- Non-Marian human psi.
There are multiple reasons for thinking the source of the Zeitoun phenomena isn't the Coptic Mary, the Roman Catholic Mary, or some other non-Protestant Mary. For discussions of the historical problems with something like a Coptic or Roman Catholic view of Mary, see the relevant articles linked here.
Some of the people commenting on Zeitoun have framed the discussion in terms of having extrabiblical evidence for Christianity, having photographic evidence in particular, and so forth. But we have a lot of that sort of evidence elsewhere. We have a lot of photographic, video, testimonial, archeological, and other types of extrabiblical evidence for some prophecy fulfillments (e.g., the Roman empire's destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, Jesus' influence over the Gentile world in fulfillment of Isaiah's Servant Songs), more than we have for Zeitoun. That sort of evidence for prophecy fulfillment would have to be accompanied by argumentation that addresses the objections that are raised against the appeal to prophecy, but the same is true of Zeitoun. When somebody like Cameron Bertuzzi reads Travis Dumsday's book on Zeitoun and concludes that the case is paranormal, he's doing so after reading a triple-digit number of pages providing information and argumentation. It's not as though you can simply hold up a photograph of the Zeitoun phenomena and have all of the relevant conclusions follow within a few seconds or a few minutes as an implication of looking at the photo. Rather, you need to consult sources, like Dumsday, who address the evidence pertaining to the provenance of the photos, the context surrounding them, what we should make of naturalistic explanations that have been offered for Zeitoun, etc. Zeitoun is better than the prophecy fulfillments in question in some ways, but I would argue that the evidence provided by prophecy fulfillment is better overall. In addition to the advantages mentioned above, these prophecies are more foundational to Christianity (they're part of the religion's foundational documents; Jesus associated himself with those documents and sometimes the prophecies in particular in significant ways; etc.), and that kind of prophecy fulfillment has larger implications than something like Zeitoun (the knowledge, power, and such involved in producing the fulfillments in question across such a large number and variety of contexts). And there are many other Christian miracles that have extrabiblical evidence in one way or another (healings with medical documentation, answered prayers accompanied by various forms of evidence, etc.).
It's sometimes suggested that attributing something like Zeitoun to human psi or demonic activity opens the door to dismissing Jesus' resurrection and other miracles that way. But the proponent of the human psi or demonic view of Zeitoun doesn't have to, and shouldn't, grant that something like Jesus' resurrection has equal or greater evidence against it or that Zeitoun has some of the strengths that something like Jesus' resurrection has in its favor (like the foundational nature of the resurrection). Within a Christian framework, you have to allow for a high degree of paranormal activity among non-Divine sources. Think of the activities of Pharaoh's magicians, what's done by the Antichrist and his associates in the book of Revelation, etc. We appeal to a greater degree of power for the Christian network of miracles (like Moses outperforming Pharoah's magicians and Christ outperforming Antichrist). I've discussed issues like these elsewhere. See, for example, my post from a few months ago here and the other posts linked within it. There's a hierarchy to Christian miracles, as discussed here, for example, and something like Jesus' resurrection is higher up in that hierarchy than something like Zeitoun. Whether Zeitoun has more witnesses, more photographic evidence, etc. is a distinct issue. As an illustration, think of the people who serve in two political offices. One is the mayor of a city, and the other is the governor of a state. Even if you have better evidence for the existence and activities of the mayor (because you're the mayor, because he's a close friend, or whatever), that doesn't change the fact that the governor has more authority, has more influence on society, and so forth. Zeitoun has better evidence than Jesus' resurrection in some ways, and the resurrection has better evidence in some ways (as acknowledged by Dumsday in his interview with Cameron), but the resurrection is more foundational. Within a Christian framework, Zeitoun is highly expendable. The resurrection isn't. The resurrection and its network of associated miracles is greater than any rival network, and it's greater by a large margin. That makes more sense under a traditional Christian understanding of Divine revelation than under something like a scenario in which Christian miracles are human psi or demonic.
No comments:
Post a Comment